Local sheriffs: Too early to comment on proposed laws

February 1, 2013

MARTINSBURG — Local sheriffs said Thursday it’s too early to make any public statement on any new proposed federal gun control measures amid recent statements from other sheriffs in the state who......

phenioxofTHROwarGod

MountainWhispers

Shame on any elected official who refuses to uphold the law. Sheriffs are law enforcement officers NOT judges. They have NO right to pick and choose which laws they will enforce. I call on them to resign. And I call on you cowards here to sign your names and stop hiding behind screen names. I'm Ross Ballard - gun owner, law enforcement instructor, NRA supporter, and good liberal Democrat.

TheBlueAndTheGray

TheBlueAndTheGray

Ross you have a point but a Sheriff can certainly pick and choose what laws will be enforced just look at the Federal goverment they don't enforce the laws on the books or worse break them. Doing nothing or doing it very badly is a tried and true method for many.

Another organization that sellectively enforces the law is the CTPD. When a woman has to track down a man accused of assualt and battery because the police 'couldn't locate him' when he was seen and reported numerous times at bars or simply walking around downtown. Finally the woman tracked him to his mothers and kept calling the police over and over and over until they finally showed up to make the arrest. The man was found guilty but the effort all citizen driven.

Or the time they didn't fingerprint the door a thief broke into a house through. "We aren't CSI Charles Town"

Or the time the JCSD threatened to arrest a woman for taking pictures of a man wounded in an assualt and battery that she witnessed.

NathanHaleFan

I can empathize with the officers who are reserving comments until these crazy laws actually materialize, and I can empathize with the ones who said they won't enforce an unconstitutional law (especially if that federal law violates the state constitution). It's not easy being between a rock and a hard place like our state and local LEOs sometimes are. I was a federal LEO for 10 years. I saw some idiocy where I worked.

flyonthewall

"Just like the civil disobedience of the leftists during the civil rights chaos."

This is not the same as someone who has sworn an oath to enforce the law. When Obama signed his executive actions(entire media called them executive orders), I heard some call him a nazi, commie, god, king, and a whole host of childish namecalling based on what the media reported. This is the same media you bemoan as being biased. Not one of the items he signed was an executive order, yet did we hear the media change it's reporting? There were a few, but the rest ran with the same and some still continue to use it. I can appreciate law enforcement that doesn't shoot first and ask later. If anyone deserves to be called these childish names, it's those who speak first and ask later. Look up Elwin Wilson and see what he had to say about his "civil disobedience".

Sandpiper

This is silly, very silly. There are new gun laws to be enforced and IF there are new laws and IF they are unreasonably restrictive (the Supreme Court test), then there will be a challenge and, ultimately, the Supreme Court will decide the matter. As for Blowhard’s pompous demand for existing laws to be enforced, the current gun laws aren’t. Did you see or hear what is happening in California, arguably the state with the most restrictive gun laws in the country? Officials just announced that there is a backlog of some 19,000(!) known violators whose guns cannot be confiscated for lack of enforcement funds. The violations? Being felons in possession of firearms and having mental problems. They know because AFTER these people bought their firearms, they were convicted of felonies or ruled mentally unstable. Emotions and stupidity are running very high regarding this issue. And that’s not a good thing. It brings silly results.

Sandpiper

Sandpiper

Obama is sworn to enforce the law, or didn't some of you know that? He can't make an arrest any more than Holder can but he is the head of the executive branch and that means he is the head of all federal law enforcement. Obama said he would not enforce certain laws which HE personally regarded as unconstitutional. Then there's prosecutorial and LE street discretion. These occur daily and result in some laws not be enforced and some crimes not being prosecuted. One last point. Blowhard would likely have called for the resignation of the Nazis, Fascists, and Brownshirts to resign if any of them had indicated an unwillingness to enforce certain laws.

Cynakel

The obama administration has already told DHS not to enforce laws that Obama doesn't like. They are only leading by example. Oh by the way, the President was sworn to uphold the constitution, not enforce laws.

doug25427

Sadly not many people know our Constitution well. The document clearly charges our local sheriffs as being the last line of legal defense against tyrannical government edicts. This is not a matter of choosing to uphold constitutionally sound legislation made into law. It is a matter of not enforcing an unconstitutional federal government edict which is not law. Not just the 2nd amendment is under attack. The 10th amendment has been crushed into the ground and we are paying a heavy price for this. Read and understand the Document which has kept us free and has given us liberty for the last 200 plus years.

doug25427

Sheriff Lemaster is making a smart call. There is no need for him to make a lot of noise at this time in opposition to the proposed federal edicts regarding gun control. The feds have their ways of punishing those who speak out against them. I have confidence if and when the time comes all of our sheriffs will do their constitutional duty and support the people… not the feds.

Bornandraised

There is a balance of power that exists in this country, sheriffs (and admittedly the president) do not get to choose what is Constitutional, that is a job for the Judicial Branch. The ban laws are not going to pass in Congress, much less the court system. The president proposing legislation to Congress is a regular and required portion of that position, it is up to Congress to decide whether to follow his path or another. I do not agree with all of the proposals being made, particularly the bans; but the executive branch does not make laws, only recommendations.

lupieangel

All laws are not followed in federal system or state & county. I can relate to the woman who The Blue And Gray spoke about. I had to find my ex so the state could file child support against him. And my ex at time was in the Marine Corp. Now if they couldn't find him they hsve serious problem. So I used some contacts within the Army to trsck him down at time I didn't have computer brcause this was 18 yrs ago. But then when he was released from the Marines he decided to move around to avoid child support. I then had computer & found him but the state couldn't find him. It was that they didn't want to find him. He should be in jail because he owes almost 20,000.00 in arrearages. But he hasn't even lost his driver's license like law states he should. So the laws aren't followed & who you are also has a lot to do with it.

Dirtman

Just curious: What prevents any of us from coming up from between the mountains for air, and saying we are Russ Dullard-gun owner, law enforcement instructor, NRA supporter, good liberal Democrat, Enoch, etc.?

Anonymous007

“Shame on any elected official who refuses to uphold the law. Sheriffs are law enforcement officers NOT judges. They have NO right to pick and choose which laws they will enforce. I call on them to resign.”

In what capacity have you ever served in law enforcement? Have you ever put on the uniform, enforced or upheld laws, or engaged in controlling someone’s liberty? Fact is you haven’t; being a coal miner and educator doesn’t qualify you. Bottom line, the general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed ... An unconstitutional law is void. (Source: 16 Am. Jur. 2d, Sec. 178)

Anonymous007

You state that you’re a law enforcement instructor; however does instructing courses in IT, Community Development, and Social Problems make you an expert in the field of law enforcement or constitutional law?

Based on the synopsis of the courses you currently and previously taught, clearly not!

Anonymous007

As a former student and current instructor myself, when you call someone names it only reflects poorly upon yourself and your position as an educator. Your apparent lack of experience in law enforcement and knowledge of the subject matter as well as you’re technique only provokes conclusions and actions about a matter apart from objective examinations of the facts. Is this how you teach your classes, treat those that dissent, or treat those that by choice choose to remain anonymous? Do you think you can influence anyone by calling them names? What would Dean Greenberg or Mr. Ward think of your assertions? What do you think your Native American ancestors would have to say about your position and the unconstitutionality of these perceived actions by our government to limit our constitutional rights to bear arms?

kobecan

Thanks Anon for your comments. Big Russ finishes every post with that same tired epilogue. Ross, we all know who you are, why don't you just get rid of the Golden Showers, er, Mountain Whispers moniker and just switch to your name - save us the drivel.

RADSDOC

helloooo

The WV constitution states..."Every person elected or appointed to any office, before proceeding to exercise the authority, or discharge the duties thereof, shall make oath or affirmation that he will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State, and that he will faithfully discharge the duties of his said office to the best of his skill and judgment; and no other oath, declaration, or test shall be required as a qualification, unless herein provided."

He does not take oath to the laws, he takes oath to the Constitution. Any law that contradicts the constitution is tyrannous to the constitution. If they cannot uphold their oath, they should step down or be arrested and removed from office.